bob wrote:I've communicated with Fabien and he now has an active CCC account. I'd suggest that we try to have a civil discourse and let him explain his interpretation of what has happened. I will alert the other mods to keep a close eye on these threads so that they don't get out of control. I doubt you will hear anything new or surprising, but it will be coming from a new source. What you believe is up to you, of course.

What do you mean we will not hear anything new or surprising.

You don't think Fabien saying he as never talked to Vas about this issue is not new or surprising. After Vas stated he talked to Fabien, and Fabien had no issues with Rybka regarding Fruit code. Yes, this is not news I guess if it is a given that Vas is a pathological Liar .

I do not recall Vas stating _anything_ much less that he had contacted Fabien. I remember Dan contacting Fabien and posting his reply a few times as this discussion has unfolded...

I don't think anything new will come out of this. There is no doubt in the minds of several people that Rybka was a direct derivative of Fruit. Plain and simple. Whether R4 still is or not is unknown, but it is highly likely considering that if you look at Crafty, and at the old Cray Blitz source, you can find places where code was directly translated from FORTRAN to C, and some of that code still remains today. I doubt any reasonably intelligent person would ever trash _everything_ they had written and start over. That is a year's worth of effort at a minimum...

Roger Brown wrote:
By all means proceed on this line without taking time to note the several attempts I have made to ease the tension out of this debate and address those memberes who feel that they should insult those whose opinions differ from theirs.

The tension can't be cooled off. Because the same people will say the same stupid things over and over again killing any kind of logic there is(was) in this forum.

I do not intend to follow anyone's hints or advice about banning a member and, in considering your statement to reveal unfounded things, isn't there a burden of behaviour on your shoulders to elevate those you come in contact with instead of joining them in the mess you seemingly abhor?

No. I have said that to Steve(the previous moderator) also. I will deliberately try to create fuss and throw woods to the fire just in case moderators will see what is happening with some guys.

If you don't see it (i wonder why) then this is not a place for me.

Mr Wael constantly is saying every kind of illogical things about Rybka and Vasik, and constantly trying to degrade and dishonor Rybka or Vasik.I would have no problem if he just said his opinion based on facts. But the problem is he distorts facts or more commonly he doesn't present any!

And when things are becoming difficult and you push him to the limit(like i did) he starts insulting me for example. Saying twice the same thing. Directly saying it. That i received a free copy of Rybka from Vasik in order to protect Rybka in some way here and say good things. He also told me to go to hell and shut up among other similar things.

So yeah if he escapes once again from this, i will become a similar troll and accuse every day any random member here with unfounded and totally random things like (totally random examples) Graham Banks received a copy of Hiarcs in order to say good things about it here, or john dalhem received some money from SMK in order to protect Shredder and show only good results of it in his tests, etc etc.

Every single day i will do that! It's the exact same things Wael did with me and some other members.

If he is allowed to do that, then i am too. If he escaped 3-4 times with this, i should escape too.

I'm not behaving childishly i'm just trying to bring logic back to this forum. That's why i'm creating this fuss. To make bold his posts in order you, the moderators, to see them and see how illogical and out of charter they are.

Facts....

_You are trying to make the impression that I am some kind of a VIP person here who can do whatever he wants under the protection of the current moderators.....a lie inspired by the professional lies of the Rybka team.....a fact.

_You are trying to explain your reactions with the illogical facts you are reading regarding the Rybka affair....a lie because you are arguing only with me when everyone can see that there are a lot of people sharing my opinion and supporting my views hence the logical conclusion that you're unleashed from the Rybka cesspoll to attack their most annoying enemy,me....a fact.

_You recieved a several free copies of Rybka for beta testing and hence became a loyal servant of Vasik who obey orders when his master is insulted ....a fact.

_Vasik didn't release the promised Rybka 3+ and most probably won't release Rybka 4.1 and you still bark for him....a fact.

_Vasik said in an interview and on several occasions in the Rybka forum,where he hides btbw,that he contacted Fabien and the guy simply doesn't care....the author of Shredder has mentioned the same info and I read it today here for the first time so I'm not making things up....a fact.

_You are threating to leave the forum....well....I don't think that anyone is gonna miss you so please do proceed....a fact.

Ah,if you decide to leave,will you give me the opportunity to kick you through the back door of the forum

_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

mwyoung wrote:The proof is the author of Fruit himself. "Fabien's open letter to the community". And Vas statement that he claimed that Strelka 2.0 is a clone of Rybka 1.0. This linked Fruit code with Rybka code.

Read it again, then. As many times as it needed to register. He says "legally 'there is no issue". Which means no GPL violation, i.e. no copying of code.

Now I understand of course you take Fabien for an idiot, so that you can ignoe what he writes completely, and just want to use the fact that he says anything at all as a good opprtunity to shoot off your mouth aganst those that you dislike.

But I take Fabien kind of seriously. "No copying of code, but a translation of the algorithm".

So 'poof' goes your 'proof'...

I think you are misinterpreting "translation". Certainly if I translate a book from German to English and sell it as my own, I'll run afoul of copyright laws pretty quickly if the English copy sells well.

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:_Vasik said in an interview and on several occasions in the Rybka forum,where he hides btbw,that he contacted Fabien and the guy simply doesn't care....the author of Shredder has mentioned the same info and I read it today here for the first time so I'm not making things up....a fact.

Wael - it was Stefan Meyer-Kahlen who had an exchange of emails with Fabien. You misread his post. Nobody can find any comment by Vas anywhere that he had contacted Fabien.
I know that you're angry that you feel let down by Vas, but facts are important.

Matthias Gemuh wrote:
Why do you then reject latest Ivanhoe versions even if Ippolit were a clone ?

Matthias.

I'd much rather test a new version of Big Lion!

He has a point Graham! If the first version of Rybka IS bogus then they should all be eliminated from your list. OR you do have to add AT LEAST Houdini.

You can't have it both ways!

Please follow that line of thought through.
If he adds Houdini he would also have to add Fire and Ivanhoe and whatnot. Do you seriously want to go down that road? What will happen next week when there are 10 new "original" super strong engines for them to test? Oh goodie.

This is not all black and white unfortunately, the line must be drawn somewhere. If Rybka is a bitboard version of Fruit written from scratch I don't think it can be called a clone or derivative.

I can't parse that. "version of ... written from scratch" does not compute. If it is "a version of" then it is clearly a derivative. If it was written from scratch, it clearly is not "a version of..."

???

One might even imagine that Fruit was converted to bitboard primarily to bypass clone detection and yet at the same time keep its strength.
If so this would be very deceitful indeed but where is the line between copying ideas and copying code.. It has to be drawn somewhere, and if the code is rewritten it makes some sense to draw the line there, obviously YMMV. (Now I'm sure you're hard at work on a mailbox Ippolit..

Also let's keep some perspective here. Copying of ideas is taking place all the time. OpenSource engines have made it possible for any idiot to do it, but there are also other engines on the list, old engines whos authors are so skilled in assembly that they can read the tricks and ideas in closed engines as well.

_You are trying to make the impression that I am some kind of a VIP person here who can do whatever he wants under the protection of the current moderators.....a lie inspired by the professional lies of the Rybka team.....a fact.

I'm not saying you are a vip. I'm saying that the moderators for some reasons, tolerate you and your stuff....

_You are trying to explain your reactions with the illogical facts you are reading regarding the Rybka affair....a lie because you are arguing only with me when everyone can see that there are a lot of people sharing my opinion and supporting my views hence the logical conclusion that you're unleashed from the Rybka cesspoll to attack their most annoying enemy,me....a fact.

Which are these "lot of people"? I see none.
And BTW some people don't like Rybka that's why they show some kind of understanding on you and your illogical stuff. You have a common "enemy" that's why.

_You recieved a several free copies of Rybka for beta testing and hence became a loyal servant of Vasik who obey orders when his master is insulted ....a fact.

I have received as you and everyone else a copy of the first Rybka 1.0 beta that Vasik gave it to anyone interested. After this? Zero Rybka betas.
So once again what you say is complete crap!

Again of course moderators will let you get away by spreading lies and unfounded accusations about other members(me in this case for the 3rd time).
So from tomorrow i will become a troll like you behaving the same way.

_Vasik didn't release the promised Rybka 3+ and most probably won't release Rybka 4.1 and you still bark for him....a fact.

I could care less about what he will release or not.

_Vasik said in an interview and on several occasions in the Rybka forum,where he hides btbw,that he contacted Fabien and the guy simply doesn't care....the author of Shredder has mentioned the same info and I read it today here for the first time so I'm not making things up....a fact.

Several occasions and an interview and yet you failed to provide the facts. And yet you define it as a fact. This is not just trolling it's more than that.

_You are threating to leave the forum....well....I don't think that anyone is gonna miss you so please do proceed....a fact.

I will not proceed. I will not make your life, of polluting this forum with illogical and baseless things, easy.

After his son's birth they've asked him:
"Is it a boy or girl?"
YES! He replied.....

hgm wrote:If re-writing should be considered cloning is not a matter of law, but of opinion. Like I stated before, I consider all existing engines clones of Shannon's work. But what good does that insight do me?

We are not talking about law, we are talking about the gpl and license agrements.

If you take the source code of Fruit, change it until every line is changed, the new program is still under gpl protection. Publishing it without sources and GPL license is illegal. Hard to pinch but illegal. Is this so hard to understand? When will you finally accept that?

Reading the Fruit sources, build your own engine with the ideas is fine. Using other common ideas is fine. Copying one single line out of Fruit is violating the gpl.

Your shannon clone case is misplaced. Your way of argument is rude. Noone here ever said that it is illegal to take ideas from GPL'ed code. Thats what you always try to imply. I am really sick of this kind of discussions.

I read HG Muller's earlier comment and I think he is about right that a re-write (eg. Strelka need not be GPL'ed) is legal and there is no GPL violation (Robert Houdart hinted at a slight amount of re-write of Ippolit, still an original work).

GPL covers 'modified work' or 'based on' another work. Expert opinions from the internet says the 'correct' interpretation is 'cut-and-paste' all or part. So Rybka can only be illegal if he did copy_and_paste, otherwise it is legal - he did not tell.

Rasjid.

Don't believe when you're told "There's no free lunch!" There is Linux.

hgm wrote:If re-writing should be considered cloning is not a matter of law, but of opinion. Like I stated before, I consider all existing engines clones of Shannon's work. But what good does that insight do me?

We are not talking about law, we are talking about the gpl and license agrements.

If you take the source code of Fruit, change it until every line is changed, the new program is still under gpl protection. Publishing it without sources and GPL license is illegal. Hard to pinch but illegal. Is this so hard to understand? When will you finally accept that?

Reading the Fruit sources, build your own engine with the ideas is fine. Using other common ideas is fine. Copying one single line out of Fruit is violating the gpl.

Your shannon clone case is misplaced. Your way of argument is rude. Noone here ever said that it is illegal to take ideas from GPL'ed code. Thats what you always try to imply. I am really sick of this kind of discussions.

I read HG Muller's earlier comment and I think he is about right that a re-write (eg. Strelka need not be GPL'ed) is legal and there is no GPL violation (Robert Houdart hinted at a slight amount of re-write of Ippolit, still an original work).

GPL covers 'modified work' or 'based on' another work. Expert opinions from the internet says the 'correct' interpretation is 'cut-and-paste' all or part. So Rybka can only be illegal if he did copy_and_paste, otherwise it is legal - he did not tell.

Rasjid.

And so what will you do? (and I don't mean you specifically Chan), I mean you or anybody else? I for one will continue to use Fabian's Go programs if that's helpful?